It occurs to me that perhaps I'm conservative. Or, perhaps those school buses are just really bogus.

In reading Ryan Karpeles' blog, I happenstance upon a post explaining how the South Carolina Board of Education will begin allowing advertising on school buses. Kinda like exactly like they do on the subways here in New York City.

Except when I ride the subways I'm not on my way to calculus. And the subway's primary intent is for commercial, not educational, use.

My immediate reaction? It's completely bogus. It's inappropriate. A mixing of church and state, if you will.

And I'm thinking, of course people find it offensive! I mean, aren't kids bombarded enough with marketers wanting their (parents) disposable income outside of school? Isn't it so clearly poor form to have our school buses become advertising vehicles (yes, the pun on the 'vehicles' is intended. I'm being clever while they're being bogus).

But the comments at Ryan's blog aren't what I expected. It just doesn't seem a big deal.

Sorry, I find it to be a really big deal. (And now I'm thinking that I'm a closet conservative.)

Why does this bug me so? Because it sets yet another poor precedent. And because we business folks are notorious (!) for pushing the envelope once we've got an in. Hey, that's our jobs. But it's the school's job to prepare youth and, to a point, protect them.

Listen, I get that schools are hurting but I just believe we should find another way than, well, selling out. Yeah, that's a terrific example to be setting during example-setting years.

According to the piece, "For its part, SAC promises the ads will be age-appropriate, promote a healthy and productive life, and are directly approved by district appointed personnel." (Because of course the majority of advertising promotes healthy, productive lives, folks.)

So let me get this straight: they'll now have appointees that gloss over ads to ensure they're...appropriate? The fact that you have to appoint people to review potential ads should be your first clue that this is a bogus idea.

Alas, I guess this liberal city girl is actually conservative. Or perhaps I just have very strong principles when it comes to the actual school being a pathway to promoting to youth. But now the school bus is part of the media buy.

(And while I don't have kids, I do care about youth and our failing public educational system--I promise you, advertising will NOT be the panacea, just short-term profits by selling-out to kids. Great precedent ;-)

Comments

[Cam Beck]

"So let me get this straight: they'll now have appointees that gloss over ads to ensure they're...appropriate? The fact that you have to appoint people to review potential ads should be your first clue that this is a bogus idea."

Yep. Not only is it inefficient, it gives them a power over the kids that only the parents should have.

When I was a kid, we had to sit and watch propaganda (as do today's youth), but at least it wasn't commercial. The scandal! ;)

[Stephen Denny]

To take a different angle on the artist's conception, above, it's a waste of ad dollars. No more Coke will be sold through because it ended up on a school bus.

Advertising falls well short of "public/private partnerships." There are other business models besides push advertising. Maybe we should start there.

[CK]

This just lets the wolf inside the door. I'm very, very strict on 'minding lines'...just like the issues I had with Facebook's/Beacon's privacy. Why? Because once you cross that line, within but a handful of years, that line just altogether disappears.

@Stephen: I agree it's not a good business model. It's poor form, to boot.

@Cam: Yep, the control is taken from parents. Good point. And who are these appointees to say which ads /offerings constitute a 'healthy/productive lifestyle'? Bogus.

[Paul]

I agree. But I wonder if there is another way that is more along the lines of what you preach CK? How about the kids making the ads themselves? Companies pay to be part of a program that lets kids and teaches have an open and frank discussion about how kids are marketed to these days. From that discussion, kids make ads based on what they think are appropriate ways to talk to other kids. Put the best ones on buses. Would be interesting to see what happens? If marketers are scared to give their brands over to social media, I wonder who would have the guts to give them over to a bunch of 12 year olds?

[Nedra]

This is a similar case to the McDonald's-sponsored report cards that were announced a few months ago and quickly canned because of the community outcry. Schools should absolutely not be a vehicle for commercial marketing. Social marketing on the other hand... :-)

[Brian Kirk]

that really is horrible. if this "works", i can imagine 6-months from now kids flpping through their history book or health book & getting little pop-up ads or flyers like you find in every magazine.

[CK]

@Nedra. Yup! I yelped about those report cards here (tsk. tsk. on the school NOT McD's): http://www.ck-blog.com/cks_blog/2008/01/indeed-nothing.html

@Paul: Hmmm. Let me think that one over. I need to digest that one because I hear what you're saying and the intent is there, but what I don't want is for kids to be thinking products (but thinking homework)--and while it's participatory and how co's should market to kids...my problem is that there shouldn't be ANY marketing in the schools (that includes buses, of course). I'm very mindful of these "lines" and schools shouldn't cross them. (the only "maybe" for me is when a company sponsors an extra-curricular activity...because it's "extra" not core curriculum). Make sense?

Just to be extra clear: In this post and at the McD's report card sponsorship link cited above - I'm not at all taking companies to task, I'm holding academia 100% accountable. BOGUS. Advertising won't fix a nationwide CRISIS of 30% high-school dropout rates nor will it be a profit panacea. Fix the curriculum, don't plaster the buses and the report cards. (PSST: I find education to currently be this country's leading issue cuz we are about to have a very stupid nation and it will very much be our fault. Shame on us as a 'superpower').

[Pete Bowers]

A fine line indeed, what's next, sponsored announcements? "This morning's announcements are brought to you by Burger King, the home of the Whopper." Why not just go for the big bucks and sell naming rights to each school like has happened with all the convention centers and sports arenas across the nation?

Or maybe, just maybe, educate the people in control of our tax dollars that the American education system is rapidly deteriorating and signing up for the "No Sponsor Dollars Left Behind" program is not the answer.

[CK]

"Why not just go for the big bucks and sell naming rights to each school like has happened with all the convention centers and sports arenas across the nation?"

@Pete: Oh, I was saying this last night...your gym, courtesy of Red Bull! This year's prom...brought to you by Paris Hilton. Math 101 brought to you by Frito-lay!

Fix the failing education problem. Don't throw ad dollars at it. BOGUS.

[William Tully]

Sure, advertising things like Coke, or McD's, or I dunno, Winchester shotguns is bad.. But what about religion? What happens when the district appointed personnel decides that their god is "age-appropriate and promotes a healthy and productive life"?

As far as I'm concerned, advertising McD's, guns or religion in a bus is all equally bad.

Oh, and if advertising Coke in a bus didn't drive up sales, they wouldn't bother doing it now would they?

CK: um, I'm looking for the little checkbox for being notified of followup comments but can't find one. :( I'm surprised that you don't have such a feature in use.

[CK]

@William: Agree on all. Way too subjective on determining what is appropriate. The answer? Best to "mind the line" (not cross it at all). And let's start fixing education.

I've written Typepad (my software provider)several times on that feature...but they don't seem to have it yet. So I have to use "cocomment.com". I'll write them again right...NOW (last time was a few weeks back) and tell them my treasured readers are rebelling! I am sorry and shamed. Mean that.

[David Reich]

I don't see a problem with this, ck. The only thing I would insist on is that ad be screened so we don't see tobacco, alcohol and ads for other products that would be inappropriate for young kids to see.

In some communities, the school system contracts bus companies that run city buses, so kids ride on city buses, with all the ads that are normally posted inside them.

And it could be a good thing if a portion of the ad revenue goes back to the schools, to help the kids. Channel One is a TV station that goes directly into schools nationwide, and it is supported by advertising. The schools that carry the programming get some cut of the ad money.

So there is much precedent for it.

I don't want to see more ad clutter, but it's just a part of life in this 21st century. And I don't see school buses as sacred ground.

[CK]

@david: I hear you--and thank you for the many good points...but I disagree. I do see schools, school buses--and academia--as sacred ground. But let's talk these good points of yours. As while I think this is ad vehicle is bogus, I want to give this some consideration:

Yes, many of the students here in the city (and others) use the subway. But that's not the norm and we're talking the school buses specifically designed for school kids (not multiple-use transport like the subway).

Plus, who are you...or me...or anyone for that matter to define appropriate ad material? That's a parent's job, really. If the school stays out of it, the school doesn't make/influence/take part in that decision. See?

Ah, the money angle. I hear you here BUT...when we look to the money angle it's, IMO, a bonafied way to get things passed instead of figuring out a better way to apportion money or lobby for more funding that doesn't sell-out schools. (aside: The "hey we need the money" angle is one that deserves its own post one day.)

Let me explain better: schools need money - yes. Schools definitely need reform...so they need money for that, too. But we need to look at, in reforming, just what they're opening themselves up to. Why?

Cuz you give marketers an inch...you're in a for a multiple-mile marathon. Look at the history:

Telemarketing now has a do not call list--because first it was a couple calls, then many, then calls during dinner, then until 8pm, then until 11pm. Then we were absolutely stalked.

We had ad banners. Then we had all-out pollution. Now we have entire industry sectors built on pop-up blocker software.

We throw away all our junk mail. (we throw away tons and tons of lumber annually, and for what...companies that want to sell me car insurance and forget that 85% of NY'ers don't have cars?).

Btw, what is this channel one? Please point me to it. Is it like Sesame Street and the like? (sorry to be ignorant here ;-)

On "it's life in the 21st century". It's life in the 21st century...if we allow it. It's not something out of our control, it's something very much within it. Advertising revenue is not the answer--and it's not gonna fix the education issues. It's just going to allow that inch. And that inch continues to set more precedents (and cross sacred lines). I love innovation and shrewd strategies; I detest pollution and selling-out. Make sense?

[David Reich]

Ah, the money angle. I hear you here BUT...when we look to the money angle it's, IMO, a bonafied way to get things passed instead of figuring out a better way to apportion money or lobby for more funding that doesn't sell-out schools. (aside: The "hey we need the money" angle is one that deserves its own post one day.)

Let me explain better: schools need money - yes. Schools definitely need reform...so they need money for that, too. But we need to look at, in reforming, just what they're opening themselves up to. Why?

CK, dream on. Lobbying? Reforming? Sounds wonderful, but get real.

[CK]

You really think advertising is the answer? Really?

And with a 30% high-school dropout rate, you don't think we need reform and more dollars apportioned for our schools?

And you really think marketers...once given an in...aren't gonna keep pushing?

Talk to me.

[Paul]

I see where you're coming from CK and I'd like to think that you can keep marketing out of schools. But I am not too sure, given some of the precedent like Channel 1, if it's possible. If you can't get rid of it, you need to arm kids against it imo. Giving them some control over the process might just do that. Making them aware of companies and how they market to kids makes for smarter, more prepared consumers.

[Ryan Karpeles]

Great discussion going on here. For the record, I don't agree with advertising in school buses. But I do see the potential upside, even if it's mired in subjectivity and controversy.

As far as the education system goes, it's a big mess from top to bottom. No one wants to take responsibility for their actions, so people have pushed schools to become a panacea for every child's problem. Which is a slippery, slippery slope that's proven incredibly flawed in the last few decades. (Unfortunately this requires more than a comment box or even a few posts to flesh out...)

FWIW, advertising in buses will not help a failing system. It will simply add another layer of complexity to an already troubled environment. And that's the last thing we need at a critical time like this.

[CK]

This is such an important discussion. Because it's really 2 discussions:

(1) we've got a sinking educational system. Which, again, IMO, is America's BIGGEST issue becuz most of our population is skewing older for the next 25 years and with dropout nation we're in a terrible crisis. (sidenote: Thank goodness for McD's because there's gonna be a lot of kids asking if "we want fries with that?" as that's their career path).

(2) and we have church-meets-state with advertising in schools. We're not letting the wolf in the back door. We are begging him in the front door.

And we're trying to fix some of #1 (budget crisis leading to more problems in schools) with #2 (which I fear just opens us up to pollution, as history shows).

I do need, in all fairness, to check out Channel 1 as I am ignorant on this sponsored channel. And I need to think through Paul's idea more, too.

I just can't imagine ads plastered inside school buses is progress. I'm a creative marketer/thinker...but I'm very conservative/mindful with lines.

[Toad]

The monitoring thing is what really bothers me about this program.

Because who gets to say what is "inappropriate." And what's to prevent the censors from claiming that say anti-smoking ads are inappropriate once RJ Reynolds donates some money.

It's a slippery slope, as the Supreme Court once noted, and it's why all sorts of speech we may personally find repugnant is protected in the US-- because once you start calling things 'inappropriate" where do you draw the line?

And let's be real about another thing: school busses with ads on them would be a pretty clear class marker. Upper income school districts would never submit to such a thing, so you wind up with the school bus equivalent of Wal-Mart.

I don't think you're conservative CK. Just intuitive.

[Shaping Youth]

Ah, crud, CK, there's soooooooo much more to this, I can't even begin to tell ya...From 'Bus Radio' on school buses to infiltration in virtual worlds and data mining via every techno tool imaginable, it makes my head swim. Just posted here about a FB plug-in called, "My Data is My Data" to begin to take back the net from the sales/marketing hawkers, and the FTC filing today re: the COPPA act being dissed universally, w/tweens...and a call to action for the FTC to look into teens' privacy concerns as well. More on Shaping Youth here: http://www.shapingyouth.org/blog/?p=1352

Overall, I'd echo, you're right, kids deserve better. (talk about strapping them into a seat w/surround sound like an airplane w/nowhere to go!)

Sheesh...SOMEthing should be off-limits in commercialization?! And I'd advocate that education is where we all should draw that proverbial line.

As to the point of wolves, back doors, front doors, etc., I can only say 'it's surround sound' having just come from the research data dump at CCFC on the damage of consumption driven patterns and kids in-school AND out...bleh. The infiltration is freakin' amazing...always new marketers w/new angles and venues pitching poor schools that can't afford their own materials. (Coke fitness curriculum? ahem)

We've got to wrestle control from special interest groups to appeal to a greater good, or kids will soon be learning to count with textbooks of M&Ms. sigh...

[Shaping Youth]

Ah, crud, CK, there's soooooooo much more to this, I can't even begin to tell ya...From 'Bus Radio' on school buses to infiltration in virtual worlds and data mining via every techno tool imaginable, it makes my head swim. Just posted here about a FB plug-in called, "My Data is My Data" to begin to take back the net from the sales/marketing hawkers, and the FTC filing today re: the COPPA act being dissed universally, w/tweens...and a call to action for the FTC to look into teens' privacy concerns as well. More on Shaping Youth here: http://www.shapingyouth.org/blog/?p=1352

Overall, I'd echo, you're right, kids deserve better. (talk about strapping them into a seat w/surround sound like an airplane w/nowhere to go!)

Sheesh...SOMEthing should be off-limits in commercialization?! And I'd advocate that education is where we all should draw that proverbial line.

As to the point of wolves, back doors, front doors, etc., I can only say 'it's surround sound' having just come from the research data dump at CCFC on the damage of consumption driven patterns and kids in-school AND out...bleh. The infiltration is freakin' amazing...always new marketers w/new angles and venues pitching poor schools that can't afford their own materials. (Coke fitness curriculum? ahem)

We've got to wrestle control from special interest groups to appeal to a greater good, or kids will soon be learning to count with textbooks of M&Ms. sigh...